SHELBY COUNTY, Alabama -- The Shelby County Commission is
taking the position the majority of financial responsibility for school
security in the area rests with the education districts and the cities where
schools are located.

The commission issued a letter dated Jan. 17 to Shelby
County Sheriff Chris Curry that notes "the Shelby County and Hoover school
systems and the cities where the respective physical school buildings are
located as the entities responsible for the principle source of funding for security
for the vast majority of the schools within Shelby County."

"Understanding that the Shelby County School Board and
the Superintendent has the duty to provide for safety in the county public
schools and therefore (are) responsible for establishing the approach and
eventual procedures that will address any security measures, it is the desire
of the Commission to be included in any ongoing dialog undertaken by the
Superintendent that includes the participation of all of the various
stakeholders," according to the letter.

County Commission Chairwoman Lindsey Allison in an
interview on Wednesday said three public schools in Shelby County are within
the county's unincorporated area: Inverness Elementary, Mt. Laurel Elementary
and Shelby Elementary.

The others are within cities that have their own law
enforcement agencies or contract with the Sheriff's Office to provide security
services to their communities. Chelsea and Indian Springs Village have contracts
with the Sheriff's Office for law enforcement services.

"We want to be cooperative stakeholders that have a meaningful
dialogue with all the various stakeholders to get to a good resolution with everybody,
but unfortunately legally we're not the leaders in this and financially we have
only a small part in this," Allison said.

Her comments followed concerns that have heightened
following the Sandy Hook Elementary shootings in December and reached fever
pitch locally with Tuesday's gunman in Chelsea Middle School. Curry wants the
commission to pay for additional deputies in roughly a dozen schools in the
county.

"Quite obviously I am going to be bringing a financial
request forward to them. I hope their Pacemakers are working," Curry said at
press conference at Chelsea City Hall on Tuesday night in front of more than
200 people.

Commissioners including Allison contend the county board
is wrongly targeted as the responsible party in the matter.

"It's very clear to me ... the public is being misguided on
who are the true stakeholders in this process," Allison said. "The stakeholders
start with the school superintendent and the school board. Secondly, it goes to
the law enforcement entity that either is obligated to that city by contract or
they have a department. And finally on a smaller scale the County Commission
would have a responsibility to the three" schools.

The commission is citing an Alabama Attorney General's
opinion that approves school security contracts between school boards and
counties. The opinion dated Oct. 7, 2002, under then-Attorney General Bill
Pryor involved a question from the Wilcox County Commission on the local board
of education contracting with the Sheriff's Office for security.

"The general administration and supervision of public
schools in a county are vested in the county board of education, with the
exception of cities having city boards of education," the opinion states. "Local
boards of education are accountable for compliance with statutes and
regulations regarding school safety and discipline."

School boards can enter into contracts with a county
commission only with the consent of the sheriff who must be a party to the
agreement, according to the three-page opinion. "The sheriff supervises the
employees and functions of his or her office, but the salaries of the employees
and appropriations to the sheriff's office are made by the county," the
document states.

The Shelby County Commission wants Curry to use his
budget to cover any additional security in schools.

"Having completed the budget process in September 2012
factoring in the ongoing difficult economic conditions we are currently working
under and having maintained the level funding of the Sheriff's Office and Jail
budgets, at this point in the fiscal year the Commission has no excess funds
available to contribute to the additional expenses associated with keeping deputies
in various schools within our county," according to the board's letter.

The commission suggests the sheriff look into other
sources of funding such as from pistol permit fees his agency collects. "Additionally,
contracts with cities for law enforcement that contain schools need to be
reviewed and further financial assistance from those cities may be necessary in
the circumstances," the board states.

"Yes, we are stakeholder but we are a stakeholder among
many people," Allison said. "To single out the commission with the sheriff
truly puts it in a profound disproportion as far as who is really responsible."

She added: "This is a very emotional issue that all of us
are very concerned about, but we have to be very careful in identifying who
really has the authority to address this issue. And it's not to say the County Commission
won't do their part, but we also have just as much responsibility of making sure
we're doing in it in the right way."